Carbon dating lab activity Livesextextchat now
It's just one of the tricks that have been used to make the work a little more precise. I believe he has confused the use of index fossils with evolution.
One creationist editor, who is more mellow than his unfortunate statement suggests, phrased the argument thus: Unfortunately the geologists date the rocks as the paleontologists tell them to. That passage might have come out of one of Henry Morris' books, except that Morris usually avoids crude slander. Hovind is not aware of the fact that by 1815 the broad outlines of the geologic column from Paleozoic times onward had been worked out by people who were mostly geologists.
One can hardly accuse these pioneers of evolutionary prejudice.
Nearly a half-century would pass before Darwin's book, The Origin of Species, was published!
In some parts of the world the Cretaceous is found deeper than is the Cambrian in other parts of the world.
Noah's flood might just as easily deposit the same crystal in one place as another. Pressure has nothing to do with it, and zircon crystals all have about the same density as their total lead content is small.
Just what is it that a Cambrian stratum has which a Cretaceous stratum lacks?
Evolution, working in tandem with geologic ages, can explain why we have index fossils, but evolution is needed to make the index fossils useful for dating strata.
While we're on this subject, you might wish to know the odds of arranging the Precambrian era, the seven geologic periods of the Paleozoic (Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Mississippian, Pennsylvanian, Permian), the three periods of the Mesozoic (Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous), and the two periods of the Cenozoic (Paleogene, Neogene or Tertiary, Quaternary) in their proper order by pure chance.